Tuesday, July 31, 2012

I have always appreciated Grant Petersen’s pragmatic,
down-to-earth approach to cycling. When
I read his new book, Just Ride, this appreciation took a step up. I now regard Petersen as the bicycling “big
brother” I never had. I know the term
“Big Brother” has acquired negative connotations since 1984, so I want
to make sure readers understand that I am talking about my REAL big brother,
not some authoritarian, Orwellian nightmare.
When I was a kid, I could ask my big brother anything, and I knew that
he would draw from his huge stores of knowledge and wisdom (he had, after all,
been fueling these stores for two whole years longer than I had) and provide me
with a simple, straightforward answer geared toward my interests.

Question: “Which would be grosser, eating a handful or lima
beans or a handful of worms?”

Answer (after furrowing his brow and rubbing his chin
thoughtfully): “Well, they’d both be extremely gross, but at least you could
brag about the worms at school the next day, so I‘d go with the worms.”

That is how I view the advice in Petersen’s book. The cycling world asks him questions, such as
“What should I wear when I ride my bike?”
He thinks about is (for decades, in this case) and answers, “Just wear
normal clothes, but wear comfortable ones that keep you cool.” Please note that I am paraphrasing his
response, but I think it is a pretty good summation. In general, Petersen draws up his vast
experience with bicycles and bicycling to give us answers that are
straightforward, honest and simple. Readers
do not have to agree with everything he says.
I know that I certainly do not, but I respect his integrity and his
experience. He has discovered many
bicycle-related things that work well for him, and Just Ride is the
soapbox he stands upon to tell the rest of the world what he has learned.

A nicely set up Rivendell, Photo by Jim Edgar / Cyclofiend.com

Here are some of Petersen’s pearls of wisdom (paraphrased
again):

-Racing bicycles are not the right
bikes for most riders

-Tire clearance is important

-Helmets do not make riders invincible

-Your bicycle should have both a
bell and a kickstand

-You should dress like a desert
dweller when riding your bicycle

-Bicycle saddles do not, in
general, cause impotence

Petersen’s wisdom does not stop there, not by a long
shot. He discusses many more topics and
explains his opinions in great detail, but I do not want to give too much away
and spoil the book for those who have not yet read it. The only extra point I want to add here is in
regards to Petersen’s search for good, long-sleeved seersucker shirts. I have found that LL Bean (llbean.com) carries
wonderful seersucker shirts in the Spring and Summer. They are not cheap, especially in tall sizes,
but they do have long sleeves, they are light and extremely comfortable, and
they make fantastic cycling apparel when worn over a T-shirt or just by
themselves.

LL Bean Seersucker

Of course, I did not agree with everything my real big
brother said when we were kids, and some of Petersen’s advice in Just Ride
does not seem like it would work for me either.
For instance, Petersen is a proponent of a “low carb” diet. I have seen low carb diets come and go for
many decades, starting with my father’s attempt at going low carb back in the
early 1970s. In every case that I have
witnessed, the low carb dieter loses lots of weight in the first few weeks,
begins to look and feel weak and listless as time progresses, and eventually gives
up on the effort after a month or two. I
remember my mother, who is a registered nurse, was so alarmed by my father’s
appearance and lack of energy, that she put him on a regime of nutritional
supplements before he eventually gave up on the whole ordeal.

Another nice Rivendell. Photo by John Philip (CNYRIV! on Flickr)

Don’t get me wrong, here.
Petersen has found a diet that works for him, and by all accounts he is
a very healthy, extremely active person.
I applaud him for his diligence and wish him the best. I also imagine that there will be readers for
whom his dietary advice works perfectly.
I am just not one of them.
Petersen and I had a good discussion about diet, exercise and other
issues. See my recent interview with him for more details.

Another disconnect I have with the book is Petersen’s suggestion
that cycling may not be the best way to lose weight and keep it off. My personal experience is that, if I ride at
least four days per week, even if I average less than twenty miles per day, my
weight goes down and stays down. I
talked to Petersen about this as well, and his answer was, essentially, “Do
what works for you,” which always strikes me as the best answer to most
questions. See my interview withPetersen for elaboration.

A Rivendell, yearning for the road. Photo by rivendoctrinated on Flickr

Nitpicking aside, I agree with almost everything Petersen
says in his book. Just Ride is a
compendium of common sense meeting up with decades of real-world
experience. However, it is not for
everyone. If you want your bicycle to be
a symbol of your technological superiority over everyone you know, you will
hate Petersen’s practical advice about simple, low-tech steel bicycles. If you think that only racers are “serious”
bicyclers, you will hate Petersen’s assertions that racing is “ruining the
breed.” If you want to use bicycling as
an excuse to get an entirely new, expensive wardrobe, you will not want to read
Petersen’s recommendations that you ride in clothes that you could wear
anywhere without being embarrassed.
Finally and most importantly, if you want bicycling to be complicated,
punishing work, you will hate Petersen’s
advice that we all ride for the sheer joy of riding. If, on the other hand, you are looking for
advice on how to make bicycling an enjoyable pastime that will make you happy
well into your sunset years, then just read.

The following is my interview with Grant Petersen on his new book, Just Ride. To read my review of the book, click here.

Q: A few years back, I got a job that was within biking
distance from my house. I went from riding 25-40 miles on Saturdays to
commuting 12 miles per day, three or four days per week, plus the normal
Saturday ride. As you suggest, my appetite increased when I was riding to
work, and I definitely ate more. Since I really love baked goods, I ate
many more carbs. Despite my increased eating, I lost about 30 pounds in
three months! Without trying! Then, when I quit that awful job and
went back to car commuting, I put all that weight back on in a few
months. In your book, you warn that cycling is not the best way to lose
weight. Does my experience surprise you? Or does it fit in with
your experience?

A: Well...my
experience is no more proof of the science than yours is, which is why we have
science in the first place. Personal experiences tend to trump science, at
least in what any one person comes to believe, and I think that's natural. It's
the "after this, therefore because of this" trap, I think---though.

I believe with every semester of my undegreed education,
that exercise increases appetite, and that you can hold off for a while, but
eventually your body's going to find the balance point between calories eaten
and burned; and that's why I don't believe going out and burning up a bunch of
calories is a good way to lose fat. I think (and the science that is beyond my
ability to explain it) that the way to lose fat is to mobilize it as a source
for gettin' around fuel---to become a fat-burner rather than a sugar burner.
The only way to do that is to keep the
insulin low in your blood by means of keeping the glucose low, and the
way to do that is to lower your carb intake. Some people--who are
insulin-sensitive (the opposite of diabetic) can eat a bowl of cereal and drink
a glass of orange juice, and kill off the resulting glucose with a relatively
low dose of insulin. But most people aren't so genetically lucky, and over
time, the constant barrage of carbohydrates leads to increasing insulin
resistance, which means more and more insulin is required to kill off X amount
of glucose. That's why old guys get fat easily.

When people lose weight concurrent with a mileage increase, it's probably because they are more
careful with their diet, and may be eating and drinking fewer carbs. I don't think my own experience trumps the science, but
since you asked: I ride my bike every day, but fewer miles. I limit my carbs to
maybe 30g a day, I check my glucose levels as though I were a diabetic, so I'm
keenly aware of which foods and what kind of exercise affect my glucose, and
therefore my insulin. I eat way less than I used to---a combination of not
refilling calories burned, and burning more body fat. By 58-year old male
standards, I am in decent shape. My blood scores--cholesterol, triglycerides,
CRP, and so on---are off-the-charts good, and eighty percent of my calories
come from fat, a lot of it saturated.

Q: Have your
recommendations regarding the relative height of the handlebars and saddle
changed over recent years. A few years ago, I seem to remember reading
something you wrote suggesting that the handlebars should be even with or less
than an inch below the seat. "Just Ride" states pretty
emphatically that the handlebars should be above the seat. Have your views
changes, or is my memory fading?

A: Yeah, they
probably have changed, but that doesn't rule out your memory fading! When I was
topping out at saddle level, I was probably overvaluing the look an
undervaluing the comfort of having the bars higher. It's important (in this
discussion, only) to realize that I'm not one way stuck for life. Even writing
the book changed me. Be careful what you say or write, because you'll end up
believing it! For me and for most people who aren't racers, bars above saddle feels
better than bars level with it or below, for the same reason that a table above
the chair feels better than a table below it. Upright isn't cool or racerly,
but it feels pretty good. Ultimately you have to balance your emotional comfort
with your physical comfort, and when you come to the point where your physical
comfort matters more...then higher bars tend to win out. For a certain kind of
riding, anyway.

Q: (Introductory
Note: In Just Ride, Petersen
describes his idea of the perfect bicycle helmet, which he dubs the “Moe
Howard” helmet, in honor of the actor on the Three Stooges. I won’t give too much away; suffice to say
that the helmet is strong, comfortable, and values function over styling) If someone started building the "Moe
Howard" helmet, would Rivendell sell it?

My son's helmet, which resembles the "Moe Howard" design in some ways, but needs more ventilation

A: I don't know. We
don't sell everything I like. Helmets are complicated. First, it couldn't be
made in China.
Second, I don't like to stock commodities, so if it were available all the heck
over the place, including on the internet for a dollar over our cost, it
wouldn't be worth it. If you changed the question to "would I buy and wear
it?" the answer is heck yes. It would be light, it would be cool, it would
allow me to scratch my head without a bent wire coat hanger, and I wouldn't
feel like I was trying to look fast by
putting it on my head. I hope somebody does make it, and for me, it
wouldn't matter if it didn't pass the ANSI tests for impact protection. As I
said in the book, those standards are designed for helmet makers, not for head
protection. The fact that they CAN save heads is incidental. A bulletproof vest
with four-inches of real bullet protection can save you if the bullet hits that
small bit of real estate, but is that a good vest to wear? Also, there's something
fishy about selling helmets that pass tests and don't protect heads under
realistic, common crash conditions. A Moe-helmet that was presented as
less protective might make you ride more
carefully, and by means of that, could make you less likely to depend on it.
And if it had that effect, it would be a safe helmet. This is a
counterintuitive possibility that some people can't grasp, but if you're one of
those who can, it makes some sense.

Q: Do your children
like to ride bicycles?

A: I'll answer for them
individually. Neither rides recreationally. It's not the time of life for them
to do that. My 17-year-old, a high-school senior, has ridden her bike to school
and downtown shopping a lot, when she had a school that wasn't 15 miles by
freeway away. She can throw a leg over a bike and pedal away as naturally as
she can sit on a sofa and read a book. But she gets a ride to school with a
driving friend these days, and she never grabs the bike and says, "Hey
folks, I'm goin' for a ride." She still rides downtown to the bookstore
now and then, although I have to say I'd jus as soon she get her driving skils
down so she can learn to be as safe in the car as she is on the bike. No doubt
she is more careful driving for having ridden a bike, though.

My 23-year-old rode to school all through high school, and
it was by any standards a brutal ride. I rode with her, and we did it because
it took way less time than driving did. Now she's living in Minnesota,
she doesn't ride for the heck of it, but she rides her bike every day to
get places--to school, work, downtown. I
visited her not long ago, on the book tour, and it was thrilling to ride with
her and see her comfort on the bike, her competency and
naturallness---although, of course, "naturallness" really just means
her apparent comfort and control. It's not natural, and it came from all the
riding she has done.

If neither daughter aspires to long tours, that's fine with
me. If either wanted to race, I'd be shocked but supportive in the same way I
support any direction they go with some forethought. But, I am proud of how my
oldest daughter uses her bike daily, and when my youngest one goes away to
school, I hope she does, too.

Q: Should I take the
training wheels, pedals and chain off my son's little 16" wheel bike and
make a balance bike out of it?

A: Yes... lower the
saddle, let him paddle. You could even do it with one of your bikes, too--I
mean, if he feels emasculated by being stripped of pedals. Grass and slight downhills are idea, but flat
works great, too. How fun! Remember every moment. You'll be seeing learning
happening, and it is so wonderful.

Q: (Introductory
Note: At this point, our interview
becomes much more of a conversation. As
noted above, I do not take everything that Petersen says about carbs and salt
as gospel. That said, I was quite
impressed with his depth of knowledge on the subject. He taught me a great
deal in his book and in this ensuing conversation) In your book, you discuss replacing the salt
one loses through sweating. I've had high blood pressure since I was a
highly-fit twenty-something-year-old. Hypertension is just written into
my genes. When I lose salt from my system, I tend to think,
"Woohoo!" My doctor's stress the importance of a low salt diet
to me, and my relatives have been living much longer, healthier lives since
low-salt diets have become standard for people with high blood pressure. I assume you are not an expert on the dietary
needs of people with high blood pressure (please correct me if I am wrong), but
do you have any advice for us in terms of electrolyte and other mineral
replacement?

A: I know...all that "inside the body" stuff I
wrote about led the pub to include the disclaimer in the opening pages. My
editor referred to it as my "bloodletting" advice---

If you've been low-salting it for years or decades and still have high bp, then
either it isn't working (and something else might), and maybe you're in the
same trap that overweight high-mileage cyclists are. They're ignoring the
evidence that it's not working in exchange for believing that if they cut back
the miles, they'll gain weight hand-over-fist. (won't happen, but that's
another story). So they think it IS working.

Health worries are a pain, and there's so much contradictory information
out there. Maybe your relatives are giving low-salt more credit than it is due?
Usually when people are concerned enough about a health issue to do ONE thing,
they also change some other things.

Hmmm. I don't know (obviously), but if I had to bet, I'd bet sugar's the
culprit. Are you diabetic? Do you know your glucose levels?

Q: Thanks for the
input! I've tried to keep up with the salt/no salt debate over the
years. I guess the bottom line is that, two generations ago, everyone on
my mom's side of the family died of heart and blood pressure-related diseases
in their thirties through early sixties. Now, she is 79 and her brother
is 82 or so, and they are both doing really well. Was it the low-salt
diet that helped them? I'm not sure, but I'm not going to take any
chances, either.

My blood sugar has always been under control, generally speaking. At
times, it got close to pre-diabetic levels, but when I adjusted my diet to be
mostly vegetarian and very low in fats, all bloodwork numbers got much better.

A: That's unusual,
Forbes. Glucose rises with carb intake, and carbs are the ONLY thing that
increase triglycerides, too. It would be quite unusual, also, if your HDL
increased on a vegetarian diet.Your LDL may decrease, but the ratio of dense
(bad) LDL to fluffy (harmless) LDL will increase. A normal lipid panel doesn't
test for those, but a VAP test will...and not all labs test for it.

When I went from low-fat/high carb to the opposite, my
triglycerides dropped 75 percent, my HDL nearly doubled. You test your own
glucose? It's easy...cheap...convenient...and it tells you absolutely how diet
and exercise affect it.

Hmm... Maybe I could survive on a low-carb diet after all!
Photo by Patsy Kreitman, www.famfriendsfood.com

Q: And, don't get me
wrong, I don't gorge on carbs on a regular basis. I generally try to
maintain moderation in all things. The key word in that sentence is
"try."

A: The first two
weeks of low-carb are challenging. Moderation is fine, but if by means of
unlucky genetics or decades of carbs you have increased your insulin
resistance, then your body is producing a lot more insulin for a given amount
of carbs than it used to; so "moderate" at this stage of your life is
a lot less than "moderate" was when you were fifteen. The problem
with carbs is that they make you crave more of them.That's because carbs (by
spiking insulin) prevent you from using body fat to fuel your exercise. The insulin
diverts the calories into fat, and since you're not using them for fuel, you
stay hungry. "Hunger" is your muscles saying "feed me." If
your muscles are being fed by stored body fat, it's almost hard to get hungry.

If what you're doing is working, no need to change. But if
you're always hungry and your scores are getting worse, give up all grains and
corn and beer for a month, and you'll drop ten pounds. After four months,
you'll be down another 15 pounds. Then get your blood scores again, and see the
improvement. Well--that's enough meddling for a month, on my part!

Welcome to Cycloculture, a journal dedicated to cycling in the real world. Here, you will find interviews with folks who have dedicated themselves to making wonderful, practical bicycles and components. You will also find articles dealing with all sorts of issues related to bicycling as a means of transportation. And, every once in a while, a bit of fun.